This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Anycast assignments for ENUM/TLD registries
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Anycast assignments for ENUM/TLD registries
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Anycast assignments for ENUM/TLD registries
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Shane Kerr
shane at time-travellers.org
Fri Apr 17 15:49:52 CEST 2009
Jim, Jim Reid wrote: > >> This layer 9 stuff >> aside, I'm still uncertain whether the assignment goes to the registry >> itself >> or to some operator who provides name service for TLDs (or ENUM, for that >> matter). The former makes more sense to me. > > I am still not certain the latest draft resolves this confusion either. > > I strongly believe that the assignment should go to the registry and not > the provider of registry or DNS services for that registry. Even if > these are the same entity, their roles and their responsibilities are > different. On a practical level, the TLD or Tier-1 administrator might > want to split their anycast assignment between DNS providers: say > discrete /24s to each of them. This wouldn't be easy to do (or change) > if that anycast assignment was held by their registry operator. And > suppose the registry has a serious disagreement its registry operator or > the back-end provider changes when the contract goes out to tender. I agree that the assignment should go to the registry. -- Shane
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Anycast assignments for ENUM/TLD registries
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Anycast assignments for ENUM/TLD registries
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]